<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">I know you do
that, Paolo. And I understand that it works with Tom plugin, right? </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">The thing is
that, plugin dev that want his plugin to still be available once we move to 3.0
will need to rework his plugin. Instead of letting each one go its way, we can
:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- based on the
description and the tags, make a list of mergeable plugins and let the dev know</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- be more
restrictive and reject new plugin that duplicates an already approved one,
unless he proves that it's better than the existing, in which case he should
have improved that one. I'm not a developer and I don't know how they resist to
rules/obligations... but we need rules to expect consistency and coherence.<br>
<br>
but I know that this can't be done by only Paolo and Alessandro (and I may be
available to help). This is also what a plugin dev list may be useful for:
discuss about plugins project as it's done for Core.<br>
<br>
My thoughts about plugins are wider. I've read some remarks from people in the
survey and people complains about:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- the
duplication of plugins</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- no real way
to know/understand in which menu the installed plugin is (maybe, a
reorganisation of menus should be done with 3.0)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- the bugs in
the plugin, although QGIS project is not responsible of this (except globe?).
People should clearly know that not all plugins are done by the QGIS project.
This should be clearly added to the « Manage and Install plugins »
dialog , meaning that : </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">* the plugins
that are Core should be clearly identified ; currently I'm not sure they
have real description and an author (I don't have QGIS right now to check so
sorry if that exists) ;</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">* also
emphasize the individual authors but also the way people can report issues.
Instead of having on a single line links to homepage, bug tracker and code
repository we can have 3 lines with text like « homepage:», « have issues or
want new features, report it here : », « if you want to download
sources :». When you are not a programmer, the latter expressions are more
understandable than the former.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- the lack of
documentation : Requesting from each plugin to have a minimal documentation.
Things are not so obvious for all of us. So, as soon as there are options to
choose from, there should be a text that explains the choice. It can just be a
dialog that pops up in QGIS but there should be doc.Description is now
mandatory and it's a good thing that helps to know if a plugin can be useful or
no but doc is needed once you begin to try it. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:10pt">- the language:
I know we can't have all plugins translated in all languages but we may try to
translate their description. Make translatable the <a href="http://plugins.org">plugins.org</a> site. I
understood from Alesssandro that it will be a huge project [0] but I still
think that it will be a huge improvement for QGIS. The translated descriptions
will be retrieved in the « Manage and Install plugins » and according
to the level of translations, users can have translated descriptions for all
their plugins. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:107%"> </span></p>
These are just points I put here. Thoughts?<br><div><div><br>[0] <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2015-May/037762.html">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2015-May/037762.html</a><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-10-24 15:19 GMT+02:00 Paolo Cavallini <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cavallini@faunalia.it" target="_blank">cavallini@faunalia.it</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Il 24/10/2015 14:07, Tom Chadwin ha scritto:<br>
> Paolo always does question new plugins if they duplicate. Is that not enough?<br>
> It's the reason my plugin was created. Our is there perhaps a historical<br>
> issue?<br>
<br>
Hi all,<br>
in fact, Im' always gently pushing in that direction, with variable<br>
success. Having a more ordered structure would be very useful, but I<br>
doubt this can be implemented without threatening individual developer<br>
freedom. Junior, do you have an operative proposal on how to implement this?<br>
All the best.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">--<br>
Paolo Cavallini - <a href="http://www.faunalia.eu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.faunalia.eu</a><br>
QGIS & PostGIS courses: <a href="http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Qgis-developer mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org">Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a></font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>